Opera hits Microsoft with EC complaint

Ask Microsoft

When Apple used Safari as its built-in browser (despite you can uninstall it and it's not necessary to the continued operation of the OS), they withdrew IE for Mac, complaining that there was no way they could compete with a bundled browser.

So how can Opera compete with a built-in browser?

@Nìall Tracey

I say "I'd have" all the time and also "Wozniak and I" instead of "Me and Wozniak" like most other people of lesser IQ seem to do. Of course I will not (won't) comment on relationship (inverse or otherwise) between IQ and English teaching...

So, no browser then...

So, no browser bundled with Windows. How exactly would one go and download their preferred browser then?

Hrm. Sounds more like Opera (hate it btw), is just griping because they can't compete. MSIE, Firefox and Safari own the market. Period. And aside from Firefox, the browser comes as part of the OS install. You can then choose to use whatever you want, but it's there as a default.

hmmm

just like i guess apple will have to not bundle safari i guess? or all those linux distros that bundle firefox?

so can someone tell me how joe bloggs user can get on the internet to download firefox if IE isnt bundled with windows? why the hell SHOULD bill develop a fairy decent product only to bundle someone else's?

this is riduculous. almost all users (geeks excluded) just simply dont care - IE works fine for the vast majority so why should they have to fart about getting a new browser?

people have their choices - they can use firefox (slooooow), IE (fast cos its integrated), safari (crappppp) or opera (yes the ones us web desingers hate - in the old days it wasnt even clever enough to distinguish itself so it just appeared as IE!) i use ie6 to develop in (vast market share), and test in FF and IE7 and to be honest i prefer using IE7 over FF....

what do you expect? if you buy a ford car do you expect some bits to be supplied by fiat? do you expect ripcurl to say 'oi we supply mats so you should use ours'

its all bollocks and the type of convo that makes us look like total dweebs to none IT people. come on people.... fair enough to make alternate products but if they were THAT much better everyone would use them wouldnt they?

and because its just an extension of windows explorer how the hell can you remove it? pah!

IE Embargo! Power to the People!

Maybe the solution to the problem would be if we all designed out sites in a standards compliant way, and add a little script that says

"Oop... Seems you're using Internet Explorer. Now I *did* go to all the effort to make this site standards compliant, so it seems the problem isn't at my end. You must be using some non-compatible software that should be blown off the face of the planet. Try Firefox, Opera or Safari!"

Or such like :P

@ Ben Ruset

First off, Opera and the people behind Opera have form in this area. Yes, they are a commercial company who are out to make money, but their past behaviour has been highly principled with regard to standards promotion and quality of user experience. And in any case, they get most of their money from embedded browsers in mobile tech, not from the Windows platform.

Second, and more importantly, MS hasn't simply innovated and protected its innovation. It has embraced and extended web standards in a direct abuse of its monopoly position. Developers cannot choose not to develop for IE because of the monopoly of MS's OS and therefore, because of bundling, its browser. We know already that MS protected its OS monopoly by illegal anti-competitive practices, because it has been found culpable in court and has had to pay massive fines. So this simply cannot be characterised as an innovator protecting its innovation. This is a monopolist abusing its monopoly.

Re: So, no browser then...

Uh some sort of File Transfer Protocol should allow you to download a browser.

Maybe call it "ftp", so that it isn't so long to type the command in.

@Mark

"Your persecution complex isn't valid."

Nor are your comprehension skills, guess I should have used the "Joke Alert" icon, but I do so like to see the knee jerks.

You appear to have refuted at least on assertion that I plainly didn't make, but as the great Scot Adams says, feel free to argue with your hallucination of what I said.

[Excised by Reg Moderator]

bundling

Linux and mac bundling comparisons are irellevant.

Linux distro's come with any number of different default browsers, and many have more than one bundled, and they can usually be totally removed.

Unlike a PC with windows, Apple Mac's are just that - Apple Macs. You know what you're buying into as it's a specialist market for the most part (as is linux).

In the PC world it's different, because Windows in the defacto standard for pre-installed OS's and many users don't have an immediate knowledge of alternatives; I work as support in an FE college in Leicester (UK), and many users can barely work a computer confidently, far less make software choices!

I think it would be a great idea for all OS's to bundle, give an option the first time you boot your computer or install the OS to choose a default browser from a list. But I doubt that would ever happen...

IP thieves without browsers

Cool quote:

"The only place Microsoft comes in is when MS called Linux a cancer, unamerican IP stealer that has lots of their IP (which you'll have to take their word for it, but it really is there, honest)."

Not only is Linux not American, it's written by a Finn, who is ethnically Swedish (Linus). OMFG!!! We have to get rid of those Swedish Finns who are polluting our American Culture by introducing disgusting "free software" into our world. Not to mention all of those educational institutions who enslave "students" to produce software, for free!!!, in the name of "education" whatever that is. "Hello World" is just an insidious Communist plot, I tell you.

Also, everyone knows IP is an American construct designed to rake in the dough and pile it at media mogul's feet. Nobody but Americans and their lapdogs cares a whit about copyright, patents, or trade secrets. Doubt me? Then I have a legitimate copy of Windows (Chinese-language version) to sell you.

"Maybe call it "ftp", so that it isn't so long to type the command in."

Yeah, I'm a big fan of the old ftp. Probably couldn't hurt to point out that you can also email a tiny or zipped browser your buddy, if he was missing a browser. You could use WinZip (bundled) to open it up. Which brings me to the point of...why is Outlook Express bundled with MS operating systems?

Why is Outlook bundled with Office? OK, enough anti-M$ rant. I think M$ is doing just a fine job...damn fine job you're doing there, Billy.

@ Greg

So Apple done have an monopoly? When was the last time you saw an Apple mac sold via Apple that only had XP installed?

Apple have their own monopoly on mac hardware, and they are not forced to bundle IE with OSX.

Ok so MS dont conform to standards, so, its the webdesigners fault, if they wrote pages to THE standards and not the IE standards then MS would have to change the way IE worked, but while people are too lazy to do it the correct way, why should MS change?

Regards

Dave

@The Other Steve

Yeah, well, what I said was a joke too, eh!

And what about "FOSS isn't about Microsoft, nor RMS, nor Linux" not rebuttal of "Without MS there'd be no FOSS, linux zealot and RMS would be alone crying"? What bit of my response was evidence of hallucination?

Oh, and your "joke" was off topic: this is about MS and Opera, not Linux, not FOSS, not RMS.

Oh, and if I call you a twat, is that OK because I've put the "joke alert" icon? Or was this just me insulting you (as your post was insulting to millions of people)?

Regarding the car (Anon's post)

What if the nuts holding the wheels on were Ford specific (and had patent/copyright on them)? Would it be OK because you'd EXPECT wheels on a car (we all would, wouldn't we)? Or is it bad because for no good reason, Ford have made it so you have to go to THEIR mechanics and buy THEIR wheels?

Fortuntely for car owners, this sort of thing is ILLEGAL.

So from this POV all that's being asked is that something that is already done and accepted is enforced in software: adherence to standards where those standards help the customer.

Walk over us MS

For those of you who don't get it, lets make it very clear.

Its a matter of choice and Microsoft has gone out of it's way to limit your choices. Since the average reader of El Reg is IT savvy, we know there are choices but average people don't. Since the majority of MS's client base can't hold a candle when it comes to software they rely on whats in front of them as being "the best". Since that is an MS operating system with IE they never look to see if life could be better.

Think of it this way: A 2 dimensional man living in his 2 dimensional world thinking life is great is suddenly picked up by some 3 dimensional force. He finally sees his world for what it is and how much more in life there is outside his 2 dimensional world.

I highly doubt that it would be that momentous but you get my gist.

The solution could be done without too much trouble but MS isn't likely to do it.

Stop windows explorer from accessing the Internet and since IE is its own separate executable that can be installed like the other browsers. If a user installs it instead of Opera or FF it reverts back to the full integration we all know and loath.

If they can cripple a system with the Genuine Advantage Trojan they can do it to IE separately

@Znort666

Thirdly it's argument not arguement.

Fourthly aren't you sick to death of all the pedantic I can:-

-read a dictionary/run spellcheck in my awesome non-MS browser/install Linux/cuss more geekily than you.

I mean, come on guys I trawl the comments because the technical literacy of the average Register reader points out unique perspectives and provides some user feedback on apps I'd of never thunk of:-)

Which means: (first you brag that you're more technically advanced:-) As an actual (doubting&affirmation comment:-) user of Opera 9.5beta and back to Opera 7.0 (brag brag brag) I'm a devotee because of the included bittorrent feature (Woohoo useful information at last) that I've successfully used for downloading RedHat and Ubuntu torrents (ritual supplication to Linux fans and to stop the RIAA from subpoenaing my e-mail:-). Now all the other non-flaming (Ooerr double intendre intended) commenters feel free to rip me apart on how superior utorrent is and if anyone knows, explain how you can encrypt Opera's torrent; so people don't get into trouble and feel equal to utorrent people? We could always send Opera a petition, please? I always feel Bill has a backdoor programmed in to Windows monitoring Linux downloads so he can send the WTF_AA (Windows TaskForce Association of America:-)around to sue you. Paranoid? Who? Me? In closing: Terry Pratchett, I will always remember you. DiscWorld was my favorite vacation spot as a kid. Alzheimers will never destroy my memories of your works of literary genius.(I hope:-)

Stuart

(Why'd he use the coat icon??? Good question 'scuse me while I get my biodegradable coat.... hey why else would the background be green?? Oh! You're in a field! Well excuse me while I fetch my yellow wellies too, mehhh!*!

whats next ? also ask microsoft to provide an alternate operating system

like having a button that says : click here to boot linux ... and then the battle begins. one button for fedore , one for linux , one for ubunti one for this one for that.

And then the next step would be when you have paid for the computer you can pick up one of the models. ( sun , pc , mac , whatever ) run whatever os on it you like ( os/2 on a mac .yeah baby... ) and whatever software you want on top of it. ( irix software running in a linux window on o2s/ running on a mac ... that would be like totally cool.

so all computers would cost the same amount of money and would be able to run any operating system and any software ... then you would have a new problem. essentially all coumputers would be the same. talk about a monopoly ...

i'll ho back to my stick and continue making drawings in my sandbox 1.0. at least that hardware never fails. occasionally some rains comes along which makes the drawings a bit blurry , but that's ok ...

Standards and Bundling

I really can't believe all this tripe.

Say I'm SAGE, and I'm shipping out Line 50. It's like a competitor saying that they want me to include THEIR PDF writer instead of ME (as a developer) putting the one i've written with the app. How is this different?

I've got a much improved command line network diagnostics tool. Has ping, trace and nslookup functionality all in one. It's open source and free of charge. I demand MS allow me to get OEM's to ship my tool with their OS.

This is all about the definition of what an OS is for. If it's just to run applications on, then surely, one day, if Linux actually takes off then the GUI should not be bundled with it. Neither should beagle, or any text editior. The end-user should be forced to install their own software instead - or alternatively OEM's can put what they want in place of what the developer wants.

Is this not the same?

As mentioned above, the PC became a common place tool for the mass market due to it's ease of use. Possibly Apple could be in MS's place - but we would not have the mass adoption of computers today if it wasn't for Microsoft bundling applications with the OS. 2nd place could maybe go to Apple - but do you really think that we'd be in this situation now if MS and Apple didn't exist?! Linux has only just started to become a near-alternative for some people as a desktop. Go back to 98, 2000 etc. and it wasn't good enough - as it was too complicated. Microsoft have ensured that whilst their software isn't always the best or most secure, it's very easy to use.

Taking applications or software away from the OS is not going to help the industry as a whole. Sure, if standard were the same across all browsers then it wouldn't make much difference - but then you'll have many browsers to support, and many mail clients (as Thunderbird will obviously be used in place of Windows Mail)

Like it or not, the IT industry as we know it has been shaped by a large part due to the ease of use of the PC. The Windows PC. Why? Easy to use GUI and bundling.

Which brings me onto another point. If 70% of the world uses x to do something, but the official body states y is the real standard, who is in the wrong? Yeah, MS break formal agreed standards - and that sucks for web developers (I know, I work for a web development company!) - but is it any wonder? The standards bodies takes years to agree if they should make a pissing coffee or not, let alone to formalise the internet.

Take the 802.11.x standards. Hardware manufacturers are actually producing and selling equipment that haven't got formal approval yet (draft for 802.11n). Why? Because the standards bodies take years to approve anything. Without taking things into their own hands, large monopolies are going to be sitting on their knees waiting... why bother? Generally, MS take a draft or emerging standard, play with it then implement it. It ensures they get to market faster (generally!), and keep pushing technology forward instead of things taking twice as long.

If the standards bodies weren't taking a decade to approve something, then maybe companies wouldn't need to keep on taking things into their own hands.

Fuck Opera, I'm more concerned with ensuring that my end-users have a productive environment where they can work.

Users don't want choice. It's their if they want it, but how about opening up a PC from HP or Dell, turning it on and it just working....

That's the problem with OSS fanatics. Too much technology and idealism, rather than real life consumer requirements. That's why MS STILL (and I mean STILL - a good 10 years after I heard 'Linux for the desktkop' from a bearded guy that smelt of piss and lived in a basedment) have the VAST majority of the desktop market, a huge portion of the server market and fingers in a number of other pies that seem to be doing rather well. (most popular productivity suite, 2nd most popular MP3 player in the states I believe, one of the most (if not the most) popular IM networks, the most popular 'next-gen' gaming consoles etc.)

Instead of thinking about the technology, think of the industry. Do you really want your best mate opening up a new Dell that has Firefox installed, only to find your mother with Opera - whilst your wife is puzzled over Netscape?! Let them chose, but only if they want to.

I'm up for free choice, let people use what browser, productivity suite, web server etc. that they want. But don't make IT harder - it's taken 20 years to get here, let's not drop back to the dark ages by making things harder and harder.

Should you be able to uninstall IE? Yep. Should your system come with alternative browsers pre-installed? Nah.

Keep IE on the box, and leave installers on the system for alternative software. If people want it, they can get it - but just leave the poor, stupid, ignorant consumers alone!!!

THEY JUST WANT IT TO WORK!

@ Steven Hewitt

Your argument about de facto standards is terrifying coming from someone who clearly works in this field, because you have completely missed the point. Yes, consumers just want to work. Yes, they are not clamouring for choice. And yes, MS supplies stuff people want. But THE MARKET IS DISTORTED. We are not getting the best software or the best solutions because the market is distorted by the OS monopoly held by MS. Compliance with open standards across all browsers would improve the user experience in terms of quality, speed, reliability, and browsers exist which can do this, but the user experience is being held back by MS' direct policy of embracing and extending to keep people locked into their technology, and bundling to blind people to the existence of better technology. It is making everything on the web more expensive to do than it should be. It is making everything more buggy than it needs to be. It is acting directly against consumer interest.

If we are going to meet the needs of users who "just want it to work" we have two options. The first is to enforce international standards to ensure interoperability, and the second is to cede control to a single proprietary provider. How anyone can support the second option is beyond me.

History is repeating itself...

Remember when this happened back in 1996-1997 when Micro$oft was asked to unbundle IE after an identical complain from Netscape?

The REAL Issue

You're misinterpreting the term "bundle".

Opera is not talking about whether a program is installed on the computer or not. Microsoft already includes both AOL and MSN on the desktop of most new systems (in the US), and THAT is what you all think "bundling" means in this context.

It ain't. (heehee ... could not resist).

Microsoft adds proprietary hooks into their proprietary subsystems that are unavailable to any other browser maker. Firefox cannot get at those same hooks, and neither can Opera. This puts them at a distinct disadvantage with regard to integrating their core programming with the operating system. It is an advantage that Microsoft has taken at every opportunity.

What Opera wants Microsoft to do is remove those hooks so everyone is on a level playing field, or allow some other browser maker access to those hooks so at least they can give Internet Explorer a run for its money. THAT is what "bundling" means in this context.

If Microsoft "unbundles" Internet Explorer and forces it to run on top of the OS, in the application layer like everyone else, then a lot of their custom web tricks will fail, and they will NEED to adhere to the standards in order to achieve the same functionality. If Microsoft "bundles" an alternative browser into the OS core layer, like their own browser is, then at least that one player will be able to compete.

Microsoft will ALWAYS have a browser "installed". The question is, is it taking advantage of their humongous, perhaps monopolistic market share to crush the competition by hiding and exploiting "trade secrets"? Are they willing to go head-to-head on a level playing field with another, core-layer browser?

My guess on both fronts is "no". They can't stand to reveal their hooks, and they couldn't win in a fair fight. Ever has it been so.

Oh ... and they proved they could make a (crappy) browser that IS "unbundled" from the OS core layer when they released Internet Explorer for the Macintosh. Now if they could only figure out how to make an OS without one, they'd be ready to play.

To all the people who use M$ in their posts

...you are just sooo 1337

f$#%ing disgusting, those forever stuck in their teens shouldn't be allowed on the internet. only couple of years ago the most what they could get was a soapbox in the park, now they are all over...

@ Kris

I entirely understand the problems associated with glacial standards progress, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with MS's approach to web standards. They didn't lead in browser innovation, Netscape did. Netscape was the bad boy that extended standards in proprietary ways. What MS did came after the standards were in place. They introduced ways to tie web standards into Windows standards. They renamed OLE/DDE controls as ActiveX controls, and pushed the Windows API into their browser. Abuse. Of. Monopoly. Not innovation in the face of glacial standards progress. Vendor tie-in, anti-competitive cross-marketing, deliberate embrace and extend tactics. And then to make things worse, they cemented the mistakes they had made in rendering engines and CSS subsystems and called them features. This is nothing about innovating around standards, and all about anti-competitive business practices. And they have already been proved guilty, and fined. Case closed. How anyone can continue to defend them is beyond me.

I learnt something new!

I thought all the trolling and flaming was in the console threads, guess not.

I thought the IE problem could be sorted by just downloading a different browser and using that instead? No? IE has to be unbundled? I still haven't seen an answer to that question that didn't boil down to "M$ is teh d3v1l!". MS cause problems when they use there clout to stop innovation and destroy an opponent in the courtroom. They failed to do that, so let's just be happy and USE A DIFFERENT BROWSER. I think opera is an aweful browser, but other people love. It's available, so use it. Any other arguement is pointless. They are not forcing you to use it, they are not stopping you from using something else, so build a bridge and get over it.

As for the grammer nazis who are enjoying moaning at the english teacher, maybe you should tell the government to allow the teachers to actually TEACH grammer. It is currently not part of the curriculum and hasn't been for over 5 years.

Grumbles from an ex-english teacher. Now i'm an IT technician, which is why i can no longer spell or conjugate verbs. :)

@ AC RE: IEtab in FF

So it uses the modules that IE uses to access the windows update facility. This hardly constitutes running IE as an app. Just what is the problem with sharing modules?

For people who are that keen on separating out their base OS and each individual app I would suggest the Amstrad 1512 or the Spectrum ZX.

@ steve

Please tell me you are joking about having been an English teacher.

Aweful... arguement... grammer... there clout ...

And you've missed the point too. Dear me.

In defence of...

...M$ why shouldn't they be allowed to wack IE on the PC with nowt else? After all many parts of M$ Omniverse use the IE engine internally.

I work for a MS Gold Partner in the US - in fact we're so tied to the hip with MS it's unreal - however I was the first to tell them at a meeting that I was a happy Firefox user and there was no way on grud's green planet I was gonna become an IE groupie.

As other folk have so rightly put it, no-ones holding a gun to anyones head - and if the situation is so fricken' dire then how come Firefox et al are increasing market share year by year.

I could kinda sorta see peoples annoyances in years gone by (the days of dial up and US Robotic 56K modems) that to d/l a new browser would be a day long exercise in '5 bytes to go then "connection lost"' futility, but given the large # of peeps who have some level of Broadband is this really so much of an issue?

Or is the real problem that Opera are fighting a losing battle and are worried about becoming the Lib Dem's to the MS/Mozilla (I'll let you gentle reader pick the appropriate party affiliation here) Labour & Tory party's? (I suppose that puts Safari as the Green Party, nes-pas?)

A quick point - you may have an answer for this one

Suppose Microsoft DIDN'T bundle IE with Windows, meaning you had no pre-installed Web browser and all of you MS-haters became slightly less miserable...

How would you then download Firefox/Opera/Netscape/etc from their respective websites?

If you say FTP/Telnet/etc, how many modern day users would know how to do that?

@Mark - it's OK to hate me.

"What bit of my response was evidence of hallucination?"

The bit that says "FOSS is not about killing MS", I never said it was.

"Oh, and if I call you a twat, is that OK because I've put the "joke alert" icon?"

You may feel free to call me a twat with any icon you chose, partly because I respect your freedom of expression, but mostly because I clearly am one.

"as your post was insulting to millions of people" *

Millions ? Really ? I was aiming for the mid thousands, I feel like such an overachiever now (see above w/r/t twattyness)

;-)

*but only one of them took the bait.